The grading scales for the Garage Experience assignments are shown below.

Deliverables/Artifacts/Outputs (80%)

What

% of Course Grade

Graded by

Level of Achievement

Grade

End of year product

20%

Faculty

Excellent. The "product" is a high quality version of what it is supposed to be (we delivered what we said we would deliver or this is obviously a superior alternative). Strong evidence of iterative improvements and strong demonstration of Academy skills in the creation of the thing itself.

A

Good: The "product" is a good version of what it is supposed to be (we delivered what we said we would deliver), professionally acceptable in the context. Evidence of iterative improvements and demonstration of Academy skills in the creation of the thing itself.

B

Satisfactory: The "product" is a version it is supposed to be or a reasonable variation. It may want for more iterative improvements that we see here. There is less of a demonstration of Academy skills in the creation of the thing itself than we would hope for.

C

Unsatisfactory: The "product" falls short of what was expected. The iterative improvements from earlier versions are hard to discern. There real questions of how Academy skills are evidenced in the creation of the thing itself.

F

End of year presentation

20%

Faculty

Excellent: Top notch presentation and delivery. Both stand out as evidence of what IYA training yields. All the messaging and info that needs to be here. Audience gets it. Questions handled professionally.

A

Good: Solid presentation and delivery with only minor shortcomings. Some IYA criticisms may be warranted, but overall a demonstration of Academy training. Messaging and info mostly on the mark. Good audience response. Questions handled competently.

B

Satisfactory: Presentation and delivery good but with flaws. Some IYA criticisms may be warranted, but overall a demonstration of Academy training. Messaging and info mostly on the mark. Audience response might be subpar, questions could be handled better.

Excellent: as good or better than expected; objectives met; high marks for learning and professionalism; deliverables position us nicely for next phase of development

A

Good: all deliverables delivered; some objectives not met; room for improvement on learning and professionalism; deliverables position us nicely for next phase of development

B

Satisfactory: most deliverables delivered; some objectives not met; room for improvement on learning and professionalism; some concern about next phase of development

C

Unsatisfactory: Deliverables suggest failure to execute on plans

F

Midterm demo day

10%

Faculty

Excellent: Well chosen object for demo; strong presentation that conveys learning/progress that produced the object AND what kind of feedback you want to elicit to help you iterate forward; good evidence of real progress over the course of the semester so far; solid handling of Q&A.

A

Good: Well chosen object for demo; presentation that conveys learning/progress that produced the object OR what kind of feedback you want to elicit to help you iterate forward; evidence of progress over the course of the semester so far; OK handling of Q&A.

B

Satisfactory: Perhaps some questions about why this demo; presentation is communicative but audience left without sense of learning/progress that produced the object and/or what kind of feedback you want to elicit to help you iterate forward; evidence of progress over the course of the semester so far; OK handling of Q&A.

Excellent: as good or better than expected; objectives met; high marks for learning and professionalism; deliverables position us nicely for next phase of development

A

Good: all deliverables delivered; some objectives not met; room for improvement on learning and professionalism; deliverables position us nicely for next phase of development

B

Satisfactory: most deliverables delivered; some objectives not met; room for improvement on learning and professionalism; some concern about next phase of development

C

Unsatisfactory: Deliverables suggest failure to execute on plans

F

Milestone 2 deliverables

10%

Advisors/Instructors

Excellent: as good or better than expected; objectives met; high marks for learning and professionalism; deliverables position us nicely for next phase of development

A

Good: all deliverables delivered; some objectives not met; room for improvement on learning and professionalism; deliverables position us nicely for next phase of development

B

Satisfactory: most deliverables delivered; some objectives not met; room for improvement on learning and professionalism; some concern about next phase of development

C

Unsatisfactory: Deliverables suggest failure to execute on plans

F

Process (20%)

Participation in collective creative process

10%

Instructors

Excellent. Active, professional, positive participation in "pods" and workshops; exercises completed on time and well; evidence of contributions to classmates' projects; openness to collegial input and feedback; positive professionalism throughout.

A

Good. Participation in "pods" and workshops; exercises completed on time or well; hints of contributions to classmates' projects; openness to collegial input and feedback; mostly positive professionalism throughout.

Excellent. Professionalism in advisor relationship - communication, punctuality, etc. per advisor; time reports (WDTTG) and process blog (or equivalent) submitted regularly to advisor/instructors; milestone deliverables negotiated well in advance of deadlines, advisor kept in the loop (rather than having to track team down for updates), etc.

A

Good. All boxes on the advisor check in checklist are checked, but falls short of description under "excellent."

B

Just satisfactory. Teams don't disappear but advisor has to the the work of keeping you on track, figuring out what's going on, etc.